Expropriation must not be confused with the requisition of goods, the latter being governed by Law no. 132/1997 regarding the requisition of goods and services in the public interest. This institution can be considered as a restriction on the exercise of the right to property. The seat of matter is constitutional provisions (art. 44, par. (3) of the Constitution], provisions laid down in the New Civil Code [art. 562, par. (3)), but also special laws such as: Law no. 33/1994 on the expropriation for a public utility cause; Law no. 255/2010 on the expropriation for a public utility cause, necessary to achieve objectives of national, county and local interest.

The bottom is that vitiation of consent in the regulation of the new Civil Code, which is to mislead a person by gruesome means to get her to conclude a legal act. A novelty element is that the new regulation has renounced the distinction made in the Romanian private law, between the dolus malus and the dolus bonus, that is, between the heavy and the lightweight. The old regulation has taken this distinction according to the consequences it has or not on the validity of the legal act, the difference between the main issue and the inferior incident. Thus, the dolus dans causam contract was that which concerned important circumstances at the conclusion of the legal act, interfering with the sanction of its relative nullity, while dolus incidens related to non-limiting circumstances for the conclusion of the legal act, the act remaining valid.

The present paper is intended to be an attempt to thoroughly investigate the question of one of the ways of private property ownership, namely common property, which demonstrates that the object remains unfathomable in its materiality, whereas the property right is divided into ideal arithmetic shares, equal or unequal, that is to say the right to joint ownership on quotes, but also the common property right in deference, where the holders did not specify the share that would belong to each.

The present study proposes a careful analysis of the formal requirements of the donation contract in the light of the new civil provisions, as well as the correlation between these substantive substantive rules and the notarial procedure applicable in the matter. Since the acts of free provision are viewed by the legislator with reticence or even hostility, the protection granted to the disposer is reflected in the solemnity of the liberties. If only the written form (of the authentic notarial act or of the hologram) is required in the case of wills, the donation contract implies, under sanction of absolute nullity, the conclusion in authentic form. Considering this particularity of the donation, the role of the public notary in the drafting and authentication of such a contract is indissolubly linked to the imperative of the authentic form provided by the new Civil Code.

By inserting in the contract a termination pact simplifies invoking the termination and avoid difficulties in determining the type of failure to terminate. Consequently, it is estimated that termination express covenants are recommended practitioners, they intended to remove ambiguities having generated by the disunity of the criteria by which one can determine with clarity and certainty the existence termination non-performance of a particular contract. Given that this utility indisputable landmark termination pact, are analyzed in their content and limits invocation issue that may be raised.

Inheritance inheritance, moral component of social order. The importance of property is universally accepted as the foundation of any social order and any state system, so that the evolution of each society mainly concerns property, patrimony, patrimony transmission, and the conditions under which this transmission can be achieved. From a social and legal point of view, this is the context in which the institution of inheritance of inheritance falls, as one of the general conditions of the right to inherit.

As a rule, the right to private property is constituted as a right, but there are also situations when it is affected by ways, in which case its attributes are exercised by two or more holders. Conditional property made up of resilient property and discarded property is one of the ways to exercise the right of private property, in addition to the common property. What is specific to both the resilient and the unenforceable property as compared to the common property is that the property right on the alienated property is exercised by two holders in a concomitant and differentiated way, and not simultaneously and together, as in the case of joint property. Thus, during the existence of conditional ownership, one of the holders is the owner under a suspensive condition, and the other, properly, will be the owner of the property under resolving condition.